Categories: EtiquetteFFS FridayNostalgia

Hello Operator

Hello, could you connect me to Dr. Ferrari please? Or just give me a Ferrari in my bottom bracket.

Marco Pantani had Armstrong on the ropes. It was the Col de Joux Plane in the 2000 Tour de France and the only time Pharmy was in real, genuine difficulty during any of his “seven” Tours. So he did what any reasonable rider would do: he got on the radio with his team boss and demanded he call his coach and renowned doping genius Michele Ferrari to find out precisely how long Pantani could sustain his effort. Ferrari crunched some numbers on his custom Effort Finder-Outer Machine and got back with the good news that Pantani couldn’t hold the pace to the finish.

The problem Batman had with The Joker was that Batman was rational and The Joker was insane. And insane people don’t always do what rational people expect them to do. Like having a plan, for instance. Or wanting to make it to the finish at all. Lance wasn’t Batman – not by a stretch – and Pantani wasn’t insane. But the point is, they weren’t thinking about the race the same way. Armstrong wanted to win the Tour de France but was a stubborn ass who was too proud to let the world’s best climber drop him. Pantani, on the other hand, had already lost everything and been to Hell and back; he had nothing to lose and was more than willing to sacrifice his own Tour if it meant he could fuck with Pharmstrong, even for a bit.

So he rode until the lights went out and climbed into the team car. Ciao. Armstrong was left holding the bag. Or, rather, not holding a mussette with any food in it. Bon jour, Monsieur avec le Hammer. Comment allez vous?

Cyclists have always used whatever dubious means they can find in order to gain an advantage, this is not news. It is only natural in a sport as demanding as this, which is not to say it is by any means excusable. But cheating has been woven into the fabric of our sport since the earliest days; in the first Tours de France several riders were disqualified for getting tows from teammates via cable and jumping on trains to rest the legs and gain a few extra kilometers over their rivals in the process.

When Greg LeMond helped pioneer the use of radios between riders and the team car, I hardly think he imagined his nemesis using the technology to contact the most notorious doping mastermind in the sport in order to gain a mid-race performance update from Italy. I don’t know why that feels so much worse than regular doping. It almost feels like putting a motor in your bottom bracket or something.

Motors? Now we’re getting far-fetched.

frank

The founder of Velominati and curator of The Rules, Frank was born in the Dutch colonies of Minnesota. His boundless physical talents are carefully canceled out by his equally boundless enthusiasm for drinking. Coffee, beer, wine, if it’s in a container, he will enjoy it, a lot of it. He currently lives in Seattle. He loves riding in the rain and scheduling visits with the Man with the Hammer just to be reminded of the privilege it is to feel completely depleted. He holds down a technology job the description of which no-one really understands and his interests outside of Cycling and drinking are Cycling and drinking. As devoted aesthete, the only thing more important to him than riding a bike well is looking good doing it. Frank is co-author along with the other Keepers of the Cog of the popular book, The Rules, The Way of the Cycling Disciple and also writes a monthly column for the magazine, Cyclist. He is also currently working on the first follow-up to The Rules, tentatively entitled The Hardmen. Email him directly at rouleur@velominati.com.

Next Matching the drapes to the rug »

Previous « Velominati Super Prestige: Clásica San Sebastián 2016

View Comments

Steve Trice says:

Aug 3 2016 at 8:13 am

@chris

Do we actually know what lengths the tester did, or didn't, go to? CAS haven't actually published their findings (unless I missed them).
wis says:

Aug 3 2016 at 8:37 am

Genuine question here. Wouldn't testers have the phone # of the athlete? In the Armistead hotel case (same thing apparently happened to Froome where hotel staff would let the testers up to his room) they could have called her. Also, wouldn't a responsible athlete tell front desk staff "hey, I'm an athlete and I might be dope tested while I'm here. If men with credentials show up, please call my room." Given the serious consequences, you'd think the athlete would take all appropriate and reasonable measures to ensure tests aren't missed.
chris says:

Aug 3 2016 at 8:46 am

@Steve Trice

No we don't but that was what was reported (secondhand) in the CT article.

@wis

I've no idea what the rules actually require of an athlete beyond updating their whereabouts information, but if that's all that is required I'd leave the rest of it up to the tester.

If it was a team hotel, I can't imagine it would be that hard to find someone who would understand the importance of contacting the required rider.
Steve Trice says:

Aug 3 2016 at 8:49 am

@chris

Reported second hand by The Daily Mail no less. It might be accurate, but then again.......
ChrisO says:

Aug 3 2016 at 8:51 am

They tried to call her phone but it was on silent so as not to disturb the person she was sharing the room with.

And apparently calling a phone is not an accepted method of contact anyway i.e. it doesn't count as an attempt to contact the athlete. They have to be physically at the place they nominated at that time.

Yes it seems odd that staff wouldn't let them up but think about it. A big hotel, hundreds of guests, changes of shift, front-desk staff who are given instructions by their management. Do they let in anybody who turns up and flashes a card at that them - they probably have no idea what anti-doping is. What if it was a celebrity who wanted privacy and some stalker or photographer poses as an official of something or other. Easier to just say no.
wiscot says:

Aug 3 2016 at 9:33 am

@ChrisO

They tried to call her phone but it was on silent so as not to disturb the person she was sharing the room with.

And apparently calling a phone is not an accepted method of contact anyway i.e. it doesn’t count as an attempt to contact the athlete. They have to be physically at the place they nominated at that time.

Yes it seems odd that staff wouldn’t let them up but think about it. A big hotel, hundreds of guests, changes of shift, front-desk staff who are given instructions by their management. Do they let in anybody who turns up and flashes a card at that them – they probably have no idea what anti-doping is. What if it was a celebrity who wanted privacy and some stalker or photographer poses as an official of something or other. Easier to just say no.

I hear you and I'm just being devil's advocate here, but when a team checks in, we're talking what? 15 people or more? You tell senior mgmt at the hotel who you are and what might transpire, ie drug testers showing up. Senior team management then tell hotel mgmt that if someone shows up saying they are a tester, team management are called to go and verify. I imagine an athlete can say "I'm staying in hotel X in Y city on Z date. I doubt they'll know the room # in advance. It's in team mgmt's best interests that riders don't miss tests.
Steve Trice says:

Aug 3 2016 at 11:20 am

It's all too convoluted for me. All of this testing goes on across 17 different sports, and to maybe thousands of athletes, all year round. To me LA's excuses are full of holes and bordering on desperate, but that's just an opinion. On the other hand the facts, few as they are, aren't open to debate, and as the first and third "offences" came a few days before big races that she won, I'll reserve the right to be sceptical and disappointed. I've followed the pro side of this sport for too long to not suspect fire when the smoke starts rising.?
Steve Trice says:

Aug 3 2016 at 11:22 am

Aaaaagh, where did that question mark come from?
brett says:

Aug 3 2016 at 12:53 pm

@Steve Trice

It’s all too convoluted for me. All of this testing goes on across 17 different sports, and to maybe thousands of athletes, all year round. To me LA’s excuses are full of holes and bordering on desperate, but that’s just an opinion. On the other hand the facts, few as they are, aren’t open to debate, and as the first and third “offences” came a few days before big races that she won, I’ll reserve the right to be sceptical and disappointed. I’ve followed the pro side of this sport for too long to not suspect fire when the smoke starts rising.?

This.

She shouldn't be competing at the Olympics, and probably beyond. Imagine the difference in opinions if she was Russian.
chris says:

Aug 3 2016 at 12:53 pm

This just popped up via a friend on my face book. The bit about having a minder and things possibly having been different if he'd still been on the case seems a bit crap but as someone who's a bit crap at admin I'm inclined to take her word for it. I also respect her decision not to go into family events to improve the public perception.

I am writing this statement in my own words, something I have wanted to do from the very beginning. Understandably people have questions which I want to answer as openly and honest as I can. I hope people understand that speaking with journalists is a necessary part of my job, speaking directly to the public in a statement like this, which has not been ghost written or moulded by somebody else is un heard of. I want to take responsibility for this message, this is my life and not a game of headlines. I want to state the facts but also try to explain my situation further. I believe I owe this statement to sports fans, people who love sport like I do.

As an 18 year old school girl I was introduced to the whereabouts system. 9 years ago. Since then the system has evolved and developed, post October 2015 I recognised this and requested further education from UKAD, I will come back to this later.

By submitting my whereabouts I am consenting to people coming into my house or hotel and taking blood and urine samples. This is a part of my sport that I accept and whole heartedly support.

To add some background before I explain the specific details of my 3 'strikes'.

I have been tested 16 times in 2016.

I have a clear and valid blood passport (a more detailed use of looking for doping violations by looking for trends vs anomalies in my blood values)

I have been tested after every victory this season.

I am on the road for around 250 days a year, with around 60 race days.

I have never tested positive for a banned substance.

I have never taken a band substance.

I will present the facts of my 3 'strikes'

Sweden 20th August 2015

UKAD are allowed a maximum of 2 weeks to inform you of a 'strike'. When I received the letter from UKAD I immediately contested it with a written explanation, this was not accepted on the eve of me travelling to America for my world championships. I had no legal advise or external support at the time.

Last week:

CAS ruled quickly and unanimously in my favour and cleared me of any wrong doing, because:

I was at the hotel I stated.

The DCO didn't do what was reasonable or necessary to find me.

I was tested the next day, this test was negative.

Calling an athletes mobile phone is not a method approved by UKAD to try and locate an athlete, as such it is not an argument against me that I slept with my phone on silent in order not to disturb a room mate.

Put simply I was available and willing to provide a sample for UKAD.

2nd 'strike' October 2015

Despite being reported as a 'missed test' this was in fact a 'filing failure'

UKAD did not try to test me, instead this was an administrative spot check. They found an inconsistency between an overnight accommodation and a morning time slot.

A busy post world championship period meant I had no firm plans and as such was changing address and plans very quickly. I made a mistake. This was an honest mistake rather than trying to deceive anybody. A mistake that many athletes who are honest with themselves will admit to having made themselves. I was Tested by UKAD later that week and produced a negative result.

In December 2015 I met with UKAD and British cycling to discuss a support plan in order to avoid a 3rd potential 'strike'

Simon Thornton from British Cycling was put in place to check my whereabouts on a bi weekly basis. We had regular contact and he would help me with any problems, effectively he was a fail safe mechanism. Since meeting with UKAD my whereabouts updates have been as detailed and specific as they can possibly be. Going as far as I can in describing my locations to avoid any further issues.

Unfortunately this system fell apart on the 9th of June when UKAD tried to test me in my hour slot and I was not where I had stated I would be. Simon Thornton had left BC 3 weeks prior to my strike without anybody informing me. We worked under a policy of 'no news was good news' as outlined in my support plan with UKAD. If Simon was still in place the following oversight could have been prevented. My over night accommodation ( the bed in which I was sleeping the morning of the test) was correct, but I had failed to change the one hour testing slot, it was clearly impossible to be in both locations.

This is where I believe I have the right to privacy. My personal family circumstances at the time of the test were incredibly difficult, the medical evidence provided in my case was not contested by UKAD, they accepted the circumstances I was in. UKAD did not perceive my situation to be 'extreme' enough to alleviate me of a negligence charge. A physiatrist assessment of my state of mind at the time was contrary. In my defence I was dealing with a traumatic time and i forgot to change a box on a form. I am not a robot, I am a member of a family, my commitment to them comes over and above my commitment to cycling. This will not change and as a result I will not discuss this further, our suffering does not need to be part of a public trial. I hope I have made it clear that family comes before cycling, I am not obsessively driven to success in cycling, I love my sport, but I would never cheat for it.

To conclude:

I currently have 1 filing failure and 1 missed test.

The reason this hasn't been discussed publicly until now is because I had the right to a fair trial at CAS, it is clear sensationalised headlines have a detrimental effect to any legal case.

In the days following the revelations in the press my family and I have been the victim of some incredibly painful comments. I ask people to take a moment to put themselves in my shoes, I am an athlete trying to do my best, I am a clean athlete. I am the female road race world champion, I operate in a completely different environment to the majority of athletes in the testing pool. I am self coached, I work outside British cycling and its systems, I race for a women's team that doesn't have a budget to match a world tour men's team who have staff specifically in place to supports riders with whereabouts. I don't wish to make excuses, i made one mistake which was noticed in a 'spot check' my second strike came at a time when anybody who lives for and loves their family would understand my oversight. It's as simple as ticking the wrong box on a form.

I love sport and the values it represents, it hurts me to consider anybody questioning my performances. Integrity is something I strive for in every part of my life. I will hold my head high in Rio and do my best for Great Britain, I am sorry for causing anyone to lose faith in sport, I am an example of what hard work and dedication can achieve. I hate dopers and what they have done to sport.

To any of the 'Twitter army' reading this, do yourself a favour and go for a bike ride. It's the most beautiful thing you can do to clear your mind.